Lethality of GAU-8/A 30mm

[GGTharos]

A broomstick at mach 5 will NOT penetrate the front armor of a modern MBT. ;)

A Sabot will barely pull it off.

Kinetics, elasticity, yadda yadda, /all/ of it has much to do with penetration.

[D-Scythe]

Length has absolutely nothing to do with penetration whatsoever. Mass definately, but most definately not length. Its a purely kinetic energy vs. static friction example. You can get a perfectly spherical projectile that has more mass than the target to penetrate the material as long as the kinetic energy and mass of pojecile is greater than the static friction of the material. Think BB-gun vs window. In extreme cases kinetic energy alone with a relatively small mass can not only penetrate, but demolish large objects. Think wrecking ball vs large buildings. If you want to go MORE in depth on this, I can look up the mathematical formula on how to destroy planets with a 50 ton rock.

 

So obviously not.

 

Obviously? Here's the Anderson formula (a basic derivative of it anyway) used to roughly approximate projectile penetration for APFSDS ammunition.

 

P =(1.044*V -0.194*Ln (L/d) -0.212 ) * L

 

P obviously stands for amount of RHAe penetrated. V is velocity, d is diameter. Any guesses on what L stands for?

 

I did not know tungsten steel was a secret alloy. And if SABOT rounds were classified secret ordnance, then that would make it that much harder for service members to get a job as a tanker. Ill have to research that one, I have a relative that works at Edgewood Arsenal, DPG. I seriously doubt that length has anything remote to do with penetration. It ALWAYS has to deal with kinetics. Thats like saying if I propel a broomstick at supersonic speeds I can bust open a tank. Granted that sticks of wood can penetrate brick walls at 150mph, but theres a lot of kinetic energy driving it. I can do the same thing with a grocery cart going 150mph.

 

When considering penetration, since when have the shape of the projectile become completely separate from its physical properties/dimensions? And penetration is determined by how the penetrator and the armor behaves on contact. Kinetics only affects the initial conditions for when the projectile and the armor come into contact - it has nothing to do with penetration directly, save for setting the initial conditions to favor penetration by the projectile.

 

Thus, a broom stick will never penetrate at a tank - in fact, it's more likely to vaporize on contact with the armor at hyper speeds. If you did your homework on rail guns, you'd know that if you shoot smaller, lighter projectiles at extremely high speeds, they'd more likely to vaporize on impact rather than gain any sort of penetration.

[D-Scythe]

Yes very much so.

http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-033.htm

 

Let me break this down.

 

Striking velocity V is more important than projectile weight W when attacking face-hardened (usually side) armor, due to the shock-induced failure of the plate occurring prior to the entire projectile "knowing" that it has hit something; only the upper end of the projectile gets involved, which is more or less the same no matter how long the projectile is (increasing length increases weight and the explosive-filled cavity is closer to the base than the nose).

 

So, you're basing your entire theory on the kinetics of naval cannons striking the armour hull of an enemy ship. That's great - still doesn't help your case though, cause tanks aren't armoured the same way as ships and naval guns tend to be typically much bigger than a 120mm smoothbore.

 

A home made rail gun can literally shoot a penny through a garbage can at a good distance. Ive watched a bud of mine do this, yet for the life of me I dont remember how he put it together. However its safe to say that any projectile fired from a rail gun will at least be made of tungsten steel and shaped in such a manner to give it maximum range and velocity, but yet big enough to demolish the target. Ive heard that its not quite feasible enough to put warheads on rail gun ballistics since the initial kinetic release is too great for certain explosive chemicals...ie its takeoff velocity exceeds its decay rate.

 

Doesn't matter. You said that anything can rip through - penetrate - anything given enough kinetic energy. I say it can't. Projectiles tend to vaporize on contact with anything at hyper velocities. Just google "projectile vaporization."